1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7

    Default FDNY Helmets + NFPA Compliance

    After watching numerous documentaries this weekend on 9/11, I couldnt help but notice how the fdny's helmets just have bourkes, no eyeshield or goggles. It was my understanding that you need goggles with bourkes to be NFPA compliant.

    How do they get around this? Or is anyone familiar enough to know that they carry goggles in turnouts? Thanks.

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JerseyPride57 View Post
    After watching numerous documentaries this weekend on 9/11, I couldnt help but notice how the fdny's helmets just have bourkes, no eyeshield or goggles. It was my understanding that you need goggles with bourkes to be NFPA compliant.

    How do they get around this? Or is anyone familiar enough to know that they carry goggles in turnouts? Thanks.
    Simple. FDNY doesn't wear NFPA compliant helmets.

    NFPA writes peer consensus standards -- not OSHA regulations. OSHA references NFPA on several firefighter PPE items but helmets isn't one of them.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  3. #3
    Let's talk fire trucks!
    BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,315

    Default

    Nor does FDNY ride NFPA compliant rigs.
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    61

    Default

    I believe the bourkes on Morning Pride's Ben II helmets are NFPA compliant. Slightly larger than the standard bourkes.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    EngineCO38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Windham County, Vermont
    Posts
    195

    Default

    So, I only run bourkes on my helmet too. Its not a department standard as all our newer helmets are ordered with both Bourkes and ESS goggles. Once the individual firefighter gets them its up to them to leave the goggles on or off. I took mine off because I never used them and just added clutter to my helmet, the bourkes work just fine for me.

    I don't know if this is how the FDNY does it, but it might explain it. And like someone else already said, the NFPA doesn't make rules, just guidelines that departments can follow.
    Opinions expressed by myself here are just that, mine. And not that of ANY organization or service I am affiliated with.

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by quickstangsvt302 View Post
    I believe the bourkes on Morning Pride's Ben II helmets are NFPA compliant. Slightly larger than the standard bourkes.
    1) They aren't "Bourkes" -- that's a trade name for a visor system that isn't part of any NFPA compliant helmet unless it comes with a pair of compliant goggles attached as well.

    2) The larger Morning Pride "EZ Flips" are part of a compliant Ben-2 helmet if the helmet was purchased with them attached. (They can't be retrofitted to a Ben 2 that didn't come with them and be NFPA compliant.)
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EngineCO38 View Post
    just guidelines that departments can follow.
    Departments and tort lawyers.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7

    Default

    So technically you dont HAVE to follow NFPA regulations?

    Although, I would think if one received an eye injury and was found to not be wearing compliant eye protections, their basically SOL correct?

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    184

    Default

    NFPA= Not For Practical Application

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JerseyPride57 View Post
    So technically you dont HAVE to follow NFPA regulations?
    That depends on your jurisdiction and/or department policy.

    Although, I would think if one received an eye injury and was found to not be wearing compliant eye protections, their basically SOL correct?
    Again, jurisdiction. The only question is who is SOL; the department or the individual. The tort lawyers win either way.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMac73 View Post
    NFPA= Not For Practical Application
    No, silly, it's "No Free Publications Available"...

    They tend to be very practical where application is at issue.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,060

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JerseyPride57 View Post

    Although, I would think if one received an eye injury and was found to not be wearing compliant eye protections, their basically SOL correct?
    The two issues are not one in the same. I can have on a non compliant helemt but still be wearing compliant eye protection.

    The face that eye protection alone is what makes a helmet compliant or not just shows how screwed up NFPA is. Wether or not I have goggles has nothing to do with how my head will survive an impact.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTRider245 View Post
    The face that eye protection alone is what makes a helmet compliant or not
    It's not that; it's that the 1971 standard insists on one item responsible for all head protection -- including eye protection.

    just shows how screwed up NFPA is.
    Nah, that's not an overall NFPA thing, that's a whoever on the 1971 committee is so dead set against addressing head and eye protection as seperate issues that can be addressed together, but don't necessarily have to be

    Wether or not I have goggles has nothing to do with how my head will survive an impact.
    Having a helmet has nothing to do with how your eyes will survive injuries either. It's a quirk but, as quirks go, not a big deal, IMHO.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  14. #14
    makes good girls go bad
    BLSboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    On the beach, Fla/OCNJ
    Posts
    2,859

    Default

    Who really gives a flying fcuk?!?
    AJ, MICP, FireMedic
    Member, IACOJ.
    FTM-PTB-EGH-DTRT-RFB-KTF
    This message has been made longer, in part from a grant from the You Are a Freaking Moron Foundation.

  15. #15
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Nor does FDNY ride NFPA compliant rigs.
    one of the things the rest of the country should copy. Have they seen any negative consequences after apparatus crashes?


    P.S. any one that goes to fires even occasionally would do better to get a sleeve and store their goggles in a pocket or somewhere protected. A couple fires and the goggles will be forever smoked up, and if you aren't doing outside work by the time you need eye protection your goggles will be gunked up from debris.
    Last edited by nameless; 09-12-2010 at 09:34 PM.

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,060

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nameless View Post
    one of the things the rest of the country should copy. Have they seen any negative consequences after apparatus crashes?


    P.S. any one that goes to fires even occasionally would do better to get a sleeve and store their goggles in a pocket or somewhere protected. A couple fires and the goggles will be forever smoked up, and if you aren't doing outside work by the time you need eye protection your goggles will be gunked up from debris.
    But at least you'll be compliant!
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JerseyPride57 View Post
    After watching numerous documentaries this weekend on 9/11, I couldnt help but notice how the fdny's helmets just have bourkes, no eyeshield or goggles. It was my understanding that you need goggles with bourkes to be NFPA compliant.

    How do they get around this? Or is anyone familiar enough to know that they carry goggles in turnouts? Thanks.
    Unless something has changed...we are not a "NFPA" state. We follow OSHA...and NFPA where we feel like it. Supposedly the newly issued helmets are NFPA (so says MG)...but that is just because of what the manufacuture is selling...we still have 1000s of OSHA compliant helmets in the field.

    Most of our rigs have at minimum one or two issues at least that keep them from being "compliant" with the shakedown artists from Quincy. (I'm still of the opinion that they should be investigated re: RICO statutes.)

    FTM-PTB

    PS- Never had any problems with my bourkes...they do their job just fine regardless what some self-serving, self-imposed, "experts" from the New England fire protection echo chamber might say.

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber
    JohnVBFD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, Va
    Posts
    1,479

    Default

    Much more importantly.

    Are the Speedo's issued to the Brothers NFPA compliant? I hear the 2010 issue is the strictest on Speedo's yet declaring that:

    "Any skid marks found in the liner of the Speedo is indication of severe incontinence and cause for mandatory replacement"

    This could cause departments to have to spend thousands weekly, depending on who cooks and if beans are on the menu often.
    Last edited by JohnVBFD; 09-13-2010 at 02:13 AM.
    Co 11
    Virginia Beach FD

    Amateurs practice until they get it right; professionals practice until they cannot get it wrong. Which one are you?

    'The fire went out and nobody got hurt' is a poor excuse for a fireground critique.

  19. #19
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nameless View Post

    P.S. any one that goes to fires even occasionally would do better to get a sleeve and store their goggles in a pocket or somewhere protected. A couple fires and the goggles will be forever smoked up, and if you aren't doing outside work by the time you need eye protection your goggles will be gunked up from debris.
    This. If you look at my helmet you wouldn't see any eye protection, compliant or otherwise. Doesn't mean I don't have any. Never understood helmet (externally) mounted visors/eye protection, one good fire and they were done.

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FuturePrimitive View Post
    This. If you look at my helmet you wouldn't see any eye protection, compliant or otherwise. Doesn't mean I don't have any. Never understood helmet (externally) mounted visors/eye protection, one good fire and they were done.
    that is why the NFPA changed the standard recently to allow eye protection to be in a pocket of your bunker gear and you would still be compliant. the only other item that really makes a helmet compliant is the lexan impact cap.

    disclaimer: (not an NFPA supporter)

  21. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NW Indiana
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    Might be an NFPA "compliant" form of eye protection, but i took a shot of hydraulic to the eyes with my face shield down (line on a port-a-power blew up--spray came up behind my shield) several years ago. I've worn goggles since and i think even most flip-downs offer a smaller gap than the shield.

    Your mileage may vary.
    earl

  22. #22
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Actually the the claim that Morning Pride EZ-Flips are NFPA compliant has nothing to do with how well they protect eyes. This has to do with the heat test that they do in a 500 degree oven. NFPA states that any thing above the brim of the helmet (ie. goggles or visor) must not melt and droop below the brim in order to keep the field of vision clear. Morning Pride uses the loop hole that the EZ-Flips are mounted BELOW the brim so the helmet is NFPA compliant. Yes they still melt and will block your view. I wouldn't be surprised if this loop hole is corrected on the next revision.

  23. #23
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    If you guys would go back and read the standard the face shields are ony compliant to a secondary form of eye protection. For Primary eye protection compliance you have to wear goggles that completely encompass the eyes.
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  24. #24
    Forum Member
    GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,060

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenacres2 View Post
    Might be an NFPA "compliant" form of eye protection, but i took a shot of hydraulic to the eyes with my face shield down (line on a port-a-power blew up--spray came up behind my shield) several years ago. I've worn goggles since and i think even most flip-downs offer a smaller gap than the shield.

    Your mileage may vary.
    earl
    Thats all it took for me to either look away or wear safety glasses when D/Cing hyrdo lines. One of the worst pains of my life.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  25. #25
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BLSboy View Post
    Who really gives a flying fcuk?!?
    BLS boy, let me help you out with your intentional misspelling.

    WHO GIVES A F U C K.
    Lt. Dan Harris
    Rescue Co. 3
    Memphis Fire Dept.
    danharris@iaff1784.org

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Fdny Medics Gone Wild
    By OnTheJobFDNY in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-08-2007, 01:29 PM
  2. saying from 9-11-01 and the year 2001
    By mtnfyre21 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-26-2005, 08:51 AM
  3. MY PRAYERS TO OUR FELLOW EMERGENCY WORKERS IN NEW YORK
    By actionj21 in forum Line of Duty: In Memory Of
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 09-21-2001, 04:20 PM
  4. NFPA & IAFC -- dissension in the ranks?? I hope not!
    By Jolly Roger in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-31-2001, 12:21 AM
  5. FDNY Helmets
    By FORT ff in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-26-2001, 01:03 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register